Tweet The Artist (2011) a contemporary silent

The Artist (2011, M. Hazanavicius)

(Jean Dujardin & Berenice Bejo)

French director Michel Hazanavicius have just finished shooting a new picture with a difference: it's in black and white and silent. The film is scheduled to come out on October 19, 2011 in France. According to the synopsis I found, the story is the following:

Hollywood 1927. George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) is a very successful silent movie star. The arrival of talking pictures will mark the end of his career. Peppy Miller (Berenice Bejo), a young extra girl, is going to become a major movie star. The picture tells the story of their destinies and shows how celebrity, pride and money can be as many obstacles to their love story. (translation from French)

I don't have much more details about the film. It's already listed on IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1655442/. Warner is distributing the film. It should have a release in the US at some point. It was shot in Los Angeles. The cast looks pretty impressive (John Goodman, James Cromwell) besides the two French leads. As for the director, I have seen his spoof of 50s-spy pictures OSS 117: Le Caire, nid d'espions (2006) and it was very enjoyable and tongue-in-cheek. Let's hope the recreation of the 20s will be up to scratch!
I found this interview (In French) of the director on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0wArzs_vwk&feature=player_embedded
He mentions Ford, Borzage and Murnau as being his favourite directors for the late 20s.

Sounds like a French version of A STAR IS BORN.

The film has been selected for the Cannes Festival. A few videos are available. This one shows part of the shooting in Hollywood:
http://www.canalplus.fr/c-cinema/pid3614-c-bonus-et-interviews.html?vid=412849

Thanks for posting this. Most of the locations seem to be in the Hancock Park area of Los Angeles because of the wide, flat streets. The car in the foothills is out a little ways from the city. And they do have one thing particularly right, good silent films have dogs in them.

I would like to see a actual Techniclor.

Let's be resonable, today we have all digital tools, a incredible possibility to adjust color, but most modern films now choose ugly color !

Yes, they could do many things, but they put a greened or blue greened depressed color palette, or a cyan look that resembles a 90's videoclip, or a very brow redsh, or "sad yellowed" color. It's like films had back a lot on time when color was quite disfigured.

Had they forgot how to do beatiful colors ???
This decade is so depressing, so dow... very sad fact...
Depressing films, depressing photograph style, or stupidy comedies that resemble porn.


A technicolor look could be created even using a actual camera and actual film stock, if they shoot with the proper lighting, proper make-up, and special color sets. The tecnicolor could be recreated in computer, using digital filters, including the original technics of color balance, and the resurrected dye transfer processes would take care of making prints.


OOPS, sorry... I chage subject a little.

For this french modern silent... what about a premiere using nitrate film???
France did a homage to Lumiere Brothers, in comemoration of 100 years of cinema. They give several filmakers a original Lumiere camera and a recreated nitrate film stock, following original formula used by Lumiere. Each moviemakers did a very short silent B&W films in the same old style, using the same camera film material as Lumiere.

The film poster:

Various stills:

Movie looks absolutely fascinating, can't wait to see it.

From twitchfilm:

When director Michael Hazanavicius set about reviving / spoofing the OSS 117 series of French spy films he brought to key elements to the table that helped make the first film, in particular, such a big success. First, Hazanavicius brought an uncanny ability to recreate his chosen era in a way that felt completely natural and organic. And, second, he recognized in star Jean Dujardin not just a famous comedian but all of the qualities of a classic leading man - in that case a comedic leading man, but still a leading man of that era - and drew them out on screen. Those skills will be very useful once again in Hanavicius' reunion with Dujardin in The Artist.

Originally announced as an Out-Of-Competition screening in Cannes the film has since been moved to the big show, which should give you a hint as to the level of craftsmanship on display. Here's how sales agents The Wild Bunch describe the film:

Hollywood 1927. George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) is a silent movie superstar. The advent of the talkies will sound the death knell for his career and see him fall into oblivion. For young extra Peppy Miller (Berenice Bejo), it seems the sky's the limit - major movie stardom awaits. THE ARTIST tells the story of their interlinked destinies.



BTW According to IMDB the movie will be in the classic Academy Ratio (4:3), not in widescreen.

Interesting... nice...

But only the first still really looks like a vintage nitrate still. I mean the "nitrate feeling"...

Ok, you can say many stills from silent era do not have the nitrate feeling, some look fade or with middle range too soft in contrast.

Well, it's just that the first still really got it, that feeling, more than the other stills.

Well, we don't know how the film itself will lok, but they could add some slight flicker and grain, not too much but just to remamber silent era.

I heard that some presentations in Munich, for Metropolis restoration, used a modified lab process, or grading process, to ressamble a little the nitrate glowing look on screen.

Who says those pictures are screen shots from the movie? We all know that stills from the early days of Hollywood were exceptionally sharp and detailed thanks to the large 8x10 negatives.

When I say "stills" I refer to the larger negatives and large paper prints, and not to the frame captures.

That' s why I said we don't know how the film itself will look, cause these are just stills.

Some stills from silent era look very good, with some nitrate feeling (contrast, lighting and glowing) and other loks a bit faded or without artistic lighting.

Who says those pictures are screen shots from the movie? We all know that stills from the early days of Hollywood were exceptionally sharp and detailed thanks to the large 8x10 negatives.

I was just reading about this film on fellow Nitratevillain Urbanora's blog The Bioscope. An excellent interview segment from a French culture program is available here—it's entirely in French, with no subtitles, but there are several clips from the film interspersed with the interview, so be sure to check it out. It looks like an absolutely beautiful film that really captures both the look and feel of 1928 filmmaking at its best. Hazanavicius clearly has great respect for the essential aspects of silent film—in some of these scenes (especially the one with Bejo alone in Dujardin's dressing room) you would almost think this really was a film made in 1928. Dujardin's character reminded me immediately of Douglas Fairbanks, and Bejo's has a bit of Marion Davies or Joan Crawford circa 1928 about her.

The music score sounds nice too (maybe a bit too Mickey-Mouse in the first clip we see, but it gets better).

I'm already rooting for this one to take the Palme d'Or, and I don't even know what the other films in competition are!

~Roger

Thanks for the extra link, Roger! I'll check that out ASAP.
Here are some extra pictures I found:

There's also another feature length silent film coming out in a year or so. This one is a slapstick comedy called A Self-Made Failure starring Dizzy Daniels. From what I've read so far, it's already 70 minute long (and it isn't finished yet).





There's more information and pictures from the film here.

I watched the video mentioned by Roger Skarsten. Both director and actors seem to have done their homework. They watched silents beyond the usual Chaplin and Keaton features. They mention The Crowd, City Girl, Sunrise and Seventh Heaven. Jean Dujardin watched some Fairbanks as well and Bérénice Bejo concentrated on the young Joan Crawford dancing the charleston. Interestingly the director said they gained access to Mary Pickford's house and shot a scene inside her bedroom. They also got a car that belonged to Cecil B. DeMille. As for the American players, John Goodman (playing the producer) accepted immediatly after reading the script, thrilled by the challenge, while James Cromwell (Dujardin's chauffeur in the film) asked the director many questions before he agreed. At first, they thought they would have to do with a shoestring budget and Romania. But, thanks to a generous producer, the film was entirely shot in Hollywood (locations and studios). The film is presented on May 15th at Cannes. But, it won't hit the screens in France until October 18th.

Uhhhhnnn.... about try to do silent comedies.... in our time...

I don't know...

All Chaplin impersonator I saw was a mess. I'm sure many ones was made with dedication and love, and there is a nice homage to Chaplin on youtube made by a impersonator and using all Chaplin's famous musics.
But it's just far from Chaplin talent...

Despite sound interesting, such project, of vintage silent comedy, if try to imitate talents like Chaplin, Keaton, Lloyd, have a risk of get a ridiculous result.

Uhhhhnnn.... about try to do silent comedies.... in our time...

I don't know...

All Chaplin impersonator I saw was a mess. I'm sure many ones was made with dedication and love, and there is a nice homage to Chaplin on youtube made by a impersonator and using all Chaplin's famous musics.
But it's just far from Chaplin talent...

Despite sound interesting, such project, of vintage silent comedy, if try to imitate talents like Chaplin, Keaton, Lloyd, have a risk of get a ridiculous result.

I agree that trying to do a silent film today, let alone a comedy, is difficult and I've never seen one that worked (in my opinion). And even from the clips I've seen of this one it feels very hammy and high school play-ish or like kids playing dress-up. However, it seems to be doing very well at Cannes. The Weinstein Company just picked it up for distribution and they've made only very very few disastrous mistakes.

While most of us here probably won't be too crazy about it, I think it's potentially a great thing for silent film. If enough people see it (and enjoy it), it could make them seek out more silent films. Sort of like how hearing a cover version of an old song might make you seek out the original and discover a lot more in the process.

Although I haven't been very impressed with the clips I've seen, I'll definitely see it. (I AM, however, impressed with the production itself, and the determination and apparent sincerity.)

Australian director Rolf de Heer made a full-length silent slapstick called Dr Plonk in 2008. You can see the trailer on Youtube. So there are more modern silents, but most if not all of those were made by amateur directors or filmmakers working in the niche. It's highly unusual to see someone make a modern day silent that's not a comedy. It's even more unusual when it's a (relatively) big budget that will get serious mainstream promotion now it's picked up by the Weinsteins. It could even be Oscar worthy ...

The Artists will be distributed in the U.S. by the Weinstein Company as the first Cannes entry to be sold during the festival. Not bad! This kind of immediate visibility for the film gives me hope. The director and star had previously collaborated on a pair of period parodies in OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies and OSS117: Lost in Rio, both of which are pretty funny and are available on Netflix Watch Instantly.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/05/first-cannes-deal-weinstein-co-buying-silent-film-the-artist/

Well, today ridiculous it's a fashion, and we can see by the actual stupid comedies of today.
The guy who was from Saturday Night Live, Will Ferrell, and made a remake of Bewitch, have a ridiculous style of comedy. The kind of thing that appear to be made for idiot teens, but also watched by many adults.

Old comedies could have silly things, but never looked ridiculous.

A film run well on box-office don't mean that is good. That can explain if imitation of vintage silent, in case of poor quality and poor slapstick recreation, could have good audience.

Let's get the real. The ocidental world can have laws as never had, rights as never had, technology as never... but idiots as never had too.

For other side, you said it run well on Cannes, and Cannes is not Hollywood, and probably more refined.

And we didnt saw it, so we don't know how it is.

Oohhhnn... I talked too much...

Let's hope the best for this film.

Well, today ridiculous it's a fashion, and we can see by the actual stupid comedies of today.
The guy who was from Saturday Night Live, Will Ferrell, and made a remake of Bewitch, have a ridiculous style of comedy. The kind of thing that appear to be made for idiot teens, but also watched by many adults.

Well, sure, pick the worst of the worst as your example. There are plenty of good comedies today.

Old comedies could have silly things, but never looked ridiculous.

Then you haven't seen many old comedies. There were plenty of ridiculous ones and plenty of unfunny ones.

For other side, you said it run well on Cannes, and Cannes is not Hollywood, and probably more refined.

All I meant by my mention of Cannes was that a somewhat discriminating audience liked it. Or at the very least, people have finally seen it and liked it, which is as close to a review as there is at the moment and I, for one, was curious. I did not mean or imply that this meant it would be a huge blockbuster, nor do I see how you could have thought I did. But what it DOES (at least very likely) mean is that it's not a disaster. Anyway, Cannes isn't some obscure festival that's only attended by niche-loving Europeans; it's filled with Hollywood people too. So to say "Cannes is not Hollywood" is not exactly true.

And you can't have it both ways and keep moving the goal posts. If the film did badly at Cannes you would have said "See? It didn't do well and it's probably bad." But since it was received well you're basically saying "So what? That doesn't prove anything." You're looking for the bad on all sides.

So, again, I think it could be a good thing for silent film in general because it will possibly bring some new fans into the fold even if it's not a great great film.

I'm nothing relly saying anything, just conjecturing about, since I didn't saw this film.

It's just that public reaction it's not a good reference for quality. They can like and it be really good film, as they can dislike and it be good, or like and be poor, or dislike and be poor.

I hope the best for this film. If people enjoy maybe more will come.

It's just that public reaction it's not a good reference for quality. They can like and it be really good film, as they can dislike and it be good, or like and be poor, or dislike and be poor.

Well, EVERYTHING is subjective. What you're really saying is "the public might like it but I won't, or the public might not like it but I will." It's all OPINION, not FACT. The public is never "wrong," they just sometimes disagree with you.

Released in 2010, it's called LOUIS and is based upon the childhood of Louis Armstrong. It's in color, shot in New Orleans; a worthy and sincere film although it doesn't achieve a lot of elements reminiscent of vintage silent cinema. I don't know whether it got any serious distribution -- to my surprise, I received a screener because it was being pushed for Oscar consideration.

David Shepard

To cut short a long discussion, The Artist has not been seen by the public yet. Nobody can say if the public received it well or not as it won't be shown until Sunday. The only people who have seen it are those in the Cannes selection committee.

The Artists will be distributed in the U.S. by the Weinstein Company as the first Cannes entry to be sold during the festival. Not bad! This kind of immediate visibility for the film gives me hope. The director and star had previously collaborated on a pair of period parodies in OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies and OSS117: Lost in Rio, both of which are pretty funny and are available on Netflix Watch Instantly.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/05/first-cannes-deal-weinstein-co-buying-silent-film-the-artist/

So far, I've only seen "Cairo, Nest of Spies" but continue to be amazed by how authentic it looked (and I found it very funny as well). The style, lighting as well as the color and quality of the film look itself was incredible! If this new movie is done with half the care of that one, I expect it to look wonderful and be very entertaining.

Released in 2010, it's called LOUIS and is based upon the childhood of Louis Armstrong. It's in color, shot in New Orleans; a worthy and sincere film although it doesn't achieve a lot of elements reminiscent of vintage silent cinema. I don't know whether it got any serious distribution -- to my surprise, I received a screener because it was being pushed for Oscar consideration.

David Shepard

One of the cool things about Louis is that -- at least for its first showings -- it was accompanied by live musicians (including some excellent jazz players who know a thing or two about Louis Armstrong). It would be interesting if The Artists could be shown at a vintage theater, using their theater organ instead of the sound track for certain shows.

I've been wanting to see Louis, but I haven't yet had the opportunity.

The trailer is now available on YouTube.

The trailer is now available on YouTube.

I adore the Stella Maris moment. Sure wish I was in Cannes this weekend!

The trailer is now available on YouTube.

Nice! I see apparent references to 7th Heaven (cuddling the empty coat) and Why Change Your Wife? (the dog on the table). And some nice imagery that may even be their own (I like the use of the reflection in the tux-shop window).

Those are the kinds of things that silent films used so brilliantly to explain feelings and emotions without using words. I'm curious if there are intertitles in the film -- in a story like this, they probably are not even necessary.

I'd see this.

I've seen a clip with intertitles in – it's buried in the interview on the Dailymotion site that The Bioscope linked to:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xikp86 ... shortfilms